The Limits of Ignorance

Last night, I attended a meeting at the UUHK at which I discovered one of the newest groups founded in Hong Kong called the "Hong Kong Atheists". According to its chief administrator and co-founder, it's a small group of about 50 or so with regular meet ups in cafes and bars and its declared aim is to reduce the amount of "irrationality" displayed by conservative religious (including Christian) groups in Hong Kong on matters of human rights in so far as they affect such public policy as may touch and concern not only Christians but also non-Christians alike e.g. on matters of the legislation relating to sexual rights of those with alternative sexual orientations and on the teaching of "intelligent design" at some of the Christian schools as part of the "science" of biology. 

The relations between science and the Christian religion has seldom been smooth. Christians have been taught that God created the universe including the sun, the moon, the stars, its oceans and all the plants and other living things like its birds, animals, fishes and man etc. as set out in the Genesis. This has led to a movement in America to push for acceptance of such a Bible-based or inspired theory of the origins of the universe called "creationism" and after that has gotten a bad press and a court judgment banning its teaching in certain American high schools in 1925, it hid its real motives by doing the same thing but under a different name and in what they think a more Intelligent and subtle way i.e. it passed itself off as "science" under "theory" of "intelligent design." ("ID). But the Association of American Science Teachers assisted the relevant parent in filing a suit against the relevant local authority permitting the teaching of such "intelligent design" in the classroom during its high school biology and had it successfully thrown out of the American public high school classroom for the second time in the case of Kitzmiller V Dover on December 20, 2005 by Judge John E Jones III, a Federal District Court on the ground that the Dover school board, Pennsylvania, illegitimately promoted religious beliefs in high school biology classes. This was a repeat of the famous 1925 Scopes "monkey trial" in Tennessee.  But that did not stop the promoters of "intelligent design" from continuing their struggle for what they believe to be their monotheistic and creator  "God".

In the Dover trial, the main issue was whether "intelligent design" theory was a "real" scientific alternative to evolutionary theory or whether it was a covert attempt to insert specific religious views into high school science classrooms, something prohibited by the American constitution which specifically disallows religion from improperly interfering with  the functioning of American government, which theoretically, should be secular or at least religiously neutral . A subsidiary issue is whether in adopting the specific policy, the Dover school board was motivated by a concern for the integrity of the science education or by their religious views. 

What is the eye of the storm? The Dover School Board requires the following to be read to students in biology classes: " Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence. Intelligent Design is an explanation of the the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves. With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves discussion of the origin of life to individual students and their families."

In August, 2005, ex President Bush was reported to have said, "I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught...so people can understand what the debate is about" and when pressed for an answer whether he accepted the view that ID was an alternative to evolution, he said, "I think that part of the education is to expose people to different schools of thought...you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas and the answer is 'yes". It is obvious that Bush was not answering the question posed to him but was trying to muddy the waters by turning it from a "specific" question about a biological theory into a "general" question about the right the young to be taught various feasible and "genuine" alternatives based on evidence, exactly the same strategy adopted by the promoters of ID.

Whatever may have been the motivations behind the views of Bush, this is part of what Judge Jones, appointed by Bush,  found:
"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well established scientific propositions. The citizens of Dvoer area were were poorly served by the members of the board who voted for the I.D policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover the tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID policy...Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activation of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by the national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID who in combination drove the board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the board's decision is evident when considered against the backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." 

This is what Susan Spath, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Science Education says about Bush's remarks: " It sounds like you're being fair, but creationism is a sectarian religious viewpoint. It's not fair to privilege one religious viewpoint by calling it the other side of evolution." and adds that ID was viewed as more respectable and sophisticated than biblical creationism but that "if you look at their theological and scientific writings, you see that the movement is fundamentally anti-evolution."

The Rev. Barry W Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, found Bush's comment irresponsible: "When it comes to evolution, there is only one school of scientific thought, and that is evolution occurred and its still occurring...When it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, they can be discussed objectively in public schools, but not in biology class."

Stephen Meyers, the director of the Discovery Institute in Seattle's Center for Science and Culture, a leader in developing ID, views Bush's comment as "using his bully pulpit to support freedom of inquiry and free speech about the issue of biological origins...It's extremely timely and welcome because so many scientists are experiencing recriminations for breaking with Darwinian orthodoxy."

Quite apart from the issues of whether the church should be separated from the state and the issue of whether it is permissible for teachers in American government funded high schools to teach ID, whether in the biology class or in some other class, what is the evidence for and against ID in evolution and what is the evidence that the entire universe is "created" by an intelligent superatural being?

(to be cont'd)